"Q: So you didn't see any survivors after that first strike? HEGSETH: I did not personally see survivors. The thing was on fire. This is called the fog of war. This is what you in the press don't understand. You sit in your air conditioned offices and plant fake stories in the Washington Post." Kinda reminds me of that scene in A Few Good Men where Jack Nicholson's character yells "You couldn't handle the truth!" as justification for the heinous crime he committed. Hegseth is so obviously in over his head that it would be laughable if it wasn't so serious.
The president's power to engage in war-like actions without a declaration of war by Congress should be seen as analogous to state powers (under Article I, Section 9) to "engage in War" when "actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay." The crucial limitation is the requirement of "such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay." Absent such circumstances, only Congress has the power to involve us in a war.
One of the most important attributes of the power to involve us in war is that all members of Congress are directly elected by the people who will have to fight and die in any such conflict. That's a big part of the reason for the 24th and 26th Amendments. The entire House of Representatives must stand for election every 2 years along with 1/3 of the Senate. So the People can deal fairly promptly with members of Congress who are responsible for wars of which the People don't approve.
The world is pathetic when it lines up to flatter a dictator. FIFA handing Trump awards, Switzerland showering him with gifts, governments bending over backwards to prove they have no values, only money and power.
These aren’t leaders, they’re courtiers, blowing smoke for a man who thrives on degradation. Every time they bow, they prove how hollow they are, how little humanity remains in their politics. It’s not strength, it’s servitude.
And my last piece, We Got Rich, Now What?, is a reminder of why we must think about what actually matters, because if we don’t, we’ll keep watching the world debase itself for spectacle and cash.
It seems to be worth pointing out that referring to two missile strikes of the sort at issue here is an abuse of the expression "double-tap." A double-tap (in shooting a firearm) consists of two shots fired in virtually the same instant as part of a single instance of trying to mitigate a threat. That is not what happened here. A double-tap generally can be justified easily as a legitimate use of force against an active threat. But a second shot after a threat already has been mitigated cannot be justified.
Someone else had the brilliant idea of renaming the inept goon as the Secretary of War Crimes. Quite apt, don't you think? War crimes without a war could only happen with the lawless, inept and scandalous regime/junta we're having to endure.
Trump’s entire War against Drugs has just been an excuse to be cruel to anyone that he wants to. Immigrants (the darker skinned ones only). Trump said on the news, “Somalians. We don’t want them here.” I say “WHAT? Who says so?” And there he sits, disgusting lump that he is.
So where are all the guns these terrorist fisherman are supposedly using to traffic drugs into the US? Old Pete should be shitting his pants by now. Trump, too.🤬 Thanks, Lisa. Great post.
Thank you for this analysis. As you highlighted, George Will is right, Hegseth “seems to be a war criminal. Without a war.” So it is not true that "[w]hen there’s no war" Hegseth and Trump aren’t "committing war crimes when" they 'kill people indiscriminately."
It's important to bear in mind how our Constitution addresses these issues. Article VI emphasized that all legislators are "bound" by their oaths "to support [our] Constitution." In Article I, the People vested in Congress the general power (and imposed the general duty) to "make all Laws" that are "necessary and proper for carrying into Execution" absolutely "all" the "Powers vested by this Constitution in" Congress or "the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
Article I also enumerated powers and duties of Congress that the People deemed necessary and proper. The enumerated powers and duties included "To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water" to the extent necessary and proper to support our Constitution. The enumerated powers and duties also included "To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations" to the extent necessary and proper to support our Constitution.
Congress need not have declared war before defining conduct as a war crime. "War crimes" are defined in 18 U.S. Code § 2441 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2441). Subsection (b)(2) confirms that the following can be found guilty: any "member of the Armed Forces of the United States" or any other "offender" (e.g., Trump or Hegseth) who "is present in the United States, regardless of the nationality of the victim."
War crimes include the following. An offender is guilty of "Murder" if he "intentionally kills, or conspires or attempts to kill" or even if he kills "unintentionally in the course of committing any other offense under this subsection, one or more persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including those placed out of combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause." An offender is guilty of "Intentionally causing serious bodily injury" if he "intentionally causes, or conspires or attempts to cause, serious bodily injury to one or more persons, including lawful combatants, in violation of the law of war."
It can be and in fact IS BOTH a war crime and murder.
18 US Code section 2441 adopts the Geneva Convention that defines a war crime as any violation of basic rights committed under military force.
The experts agree, so we need to call it both, not one or the other.
Quoting from the Former JAGS Working Group:
"the bottom line is that, since orders to kill survivors of an attack at sea are 'patently illegal,' anyone who issues or follows such orders can and should be prosecuted for war crimes, murder, or both."
It is well past time for Congressional committee Dems to call these heinous acts out for what they are: ‘You people are murderers. What do you have to say for yourselves?!’ No more ‘being disturbed’ or beating around the bush about what has happened. These were murderous acts by military officials. Full stop.
None of this is going to stop drug users/addicts from using drugs. Do they really think that if they kill all the drug runners, the demand will immediately disappear? There aren't enough clinics and rehab centers to deal with that situation, and as far as I know there are no plans for more.
These people are disgustingly immoral, treating us like complete morons. With each day our national security evaporates further. Just to be clear, I'm included the "highy respected" Admiral Bradley in this assessment. Throw them all out!
"Q: So you didn't see any survivors after that first strike? HEGSETH: I did not personally see survivors. The thing was on fire. This is called the fog of war. This is what you in the press don't understand. You sit in your air conditioned offices and plant fake stories in the Washington Post." Kinda reminds me of that scene in A Few Good Men where Jack Nicholson's character yells "You couldn't handle the truth!" as justification for the heinous crime he committed. Hegseth is so obviously in over his head that it would be laughable if it wasn't so serious.
Fog of un-war?
The president's power to engage in war-like actions without a declaration of war by Congress should be seen as analogous to state powers (under Article I, Section 9) to "engage in War" when "actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay." The crucial limitation is the requirement of "such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay." Absent such circumstances, only Congress has the power to involve us in a war.
We the People delegated almost exclusively to Congress the powers to authorize actions that might involve us in a war. See Article I ("To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water"). For elaboration on the meaning, see, e.g., https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C11-1-1/ALDE_00013587/%5B'marque'%5D. See also https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C11-2-5-2/ALDE_00013917/%5B'marque'%5D.
One of the most important attributes of the power to involve us in war is that all members of Congress are directly elected by the people who will have to fight and die in any such conflict. That's a big part of the reason for the 24th and 26th Amendments. The entire House of Representatives must stand for election every 2 years along with 1/3 of the Senate. So the People can deal fairly promptly with members of Congress who are responsible for wars of which the People don't approve.
How any foreign leader can sit across the table from these clowns and pretend it’s serious statecraft is beyond me.
What passes for “leadership” in the U.S. is just a circus of money and power; hollow men trading influence like chips at a casino.
The question isn’t whether they’ll break; it’s how long the world will keep pretending they haven’t already.
The world is pathetic when it lines up to flatter a dictator. FIFA handing Trump awards, Switzerland showering him with gifts, governments bending over backwards to prove they have no values, only money and power.
These aren’t leaders, they’re courtiers, blowing smoke for a man who thrives on degradation. Every time they bow, they prove how hollow they are, how little humanity remains in their politics. It’s not strength, it’s servitude.
And my last piece, We Got Rich, Now What?, is a reminder of why we must think about what actually matters, because if we don’t, we’ll keep watching the world debase itself for spectacle and cash.
It seems to be worth pointing out that referring to two missile strikes of the sort at issue here is an abuse of the expression "double-tap." A double-tap (in shooting a firearm) consists of two shots fired in virtually the same instant as part of a single instance of trying to mitigate a threat. That is not what happened here. A double-tap generally can be justified easily as a legitimate use of force against an active threat. But a second shot after a threat already has been mitigated cannot be justified.
Someone else had the brilliant idea of renaming the inept goon as the Secretary of War Crimes. Quite apt, don't you think? War crimes without a war could only happen with the lawless, inept and scandalous regime/junta we're having to endure.
Trump’s entire War against Drugs has just been an excuse to be cruel to anyone that he wants to. Immigrants (the darker skinned ones only). Trump said on the news, “Somalians. We don’t want them here.” I say “WHAT? Who says so?” And there he sits, disgusting lump that he is.
So where are all the guns these terrorist fisherman are supposedly using to traffic drugs into the US? Old Pete should be shitting his pants by now. Trump, too.🤬 Thanks, Lisa. Great post.
They don’t care. They only care if some white male skins his knee.
Typical MAGA — spend a couple weeks bragging about offing some “drug traffickers” … but when pressed, shift the blame elsewhere.
Thank you for this analysis. As you highlighted, George Will is right, Hegseth “seems to be a war criminal. Without a war.” So it is not true that "[w]hen there’s no war" Hegseth and Trump aren’t "committing war crimes when" they 'kill people indiscriminately."
It's important to bear in mind how our Constitution addresses these issues. Article VI emphasized that all legislators are "bound" by their oaths "to support [our] Constitution." In Article I, the People vested in Congress the general power (and imposed the general duty) to "make all Laws" that are "necessary and proper for carrying into Execution" absolutely "all" the "Powers vested by this Constitution in" Congress or "the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
Article I also enumerated powers and duties of Congress that the People deemed necessary and proper. The enumerated powers and duties included "To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water" to the extent necessary and proper to support our Constitution. The enumerated powers and duties also included "To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations" to the extent necessary and proper to support our Constitution.
Congress need not have declared war before defining conduct as a war crime. "War crimes" are defined in 18 U.S. Code § 2441 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2441). Subsection (b)(2) confirms that the following can be found guilty: any "member of the Armed Forces of the United States" or any other "offender" (e.g., Trump or Hegseth) who "is present in the United States, regardless of the nationality of the victim."
War crimes include the following. An offender is guilty of "Murder" if he "intentionally kills, or conspires or attempts to kill" or even if he kills "unintentionally in the course of committing any other offense under this subsection, one or more persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including those placed out of combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause." An offender is guilty of "Intentionally causing serious bodily injury" if he "intentionally causes, or conspires or attempts to cause, serious bodily injury to one or more persons, including lawful combatants, in violation of the law of war."
I find it appalling that Tom Cotton is going all-in on defending the indefensible. I never want to hear, "we are better than this" ever again.
As to “rules” governing “noninternational armed conflicts” — should be obvious by now, that Trump only obeys whim, not rules … or even common decency.
It can be and in fact IS BOTH a war crime and murder.
18 US Code section 2441 adopts the Geneva Convention that defines a war crime as any violation of basic rights committed under military force.
The experts agree, so we need to call it both, not one or the other.
Quoting from the Former JAGS Working Group:
"the bottom line is that, since orders to kill survivors of an attack at sea are 'patently illegal,' anyone who issues or follows such orders can and should be prosecuted for war crimes, murder, or both."
https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/former-jag-working-group-no-quarter-statement.pdf
https://www.justsecurity.org/125948/illegal-orders-shipwrecked-boat-strike-survivors/
It is well past time for Congressional committee Dems to call these heinous acts out for what they are: ‘You people are murderers. What do you have to say for yourselves?!’ No more ‘being disturbed’ or beating around the bush about what has happened. These were murderous acts by military officials. Full stop.
Time to stop the Trump-Hegseth murderer ethos!
None of this is going to stop drug users/addicts from using drugs. Do they really think that if they kill all the drug runners, the demand will immediately disappear? There aren't enough clinics and rehab centers to deal with that situation, and as far as I know there are no plans for more.
These people are disgustingly immoral, treating us like complete morons. With each day our national security evaporates further. Just to be clear, I'm included the "highy respected" Admiral Bradley in this assessment. Throw them all out!